20070047 Ver 1_More Info Received_20060310 (2)

Method of Wetland/LTpland Estimation for Conservation Easement Areas
Associated with R-2245, Second Bridge to Oak Island
The following method was used to produce an estimate of wetland and upland acres
within the conservation easement areas, totaling approximately 880 acres, adjacent to R-
2245, Second Bridge to Oak Island. The attached figure is a representation of the end
product of this method. This figure also illustrates the conservation easement boundaries,
the wildlife corridors, the wildlife pipe crossing locations, the Brunswick Electric
Membership Cooperative powerline location, existing dirt road locations, and existing
surveyed house lot locations.
The Microstation V8 computer program is used as the graphic tool of choice, creating a
workspace from a standard 2D mapping seed file with working units of 1 FT:10:100 pu,
allowing precision of 0.001 feet in a design plane approximately 813 miles square.
The following resources are obtained in digital format from the designated providers:
NCDOT Aerial Photography, post Hurricane Isabel, 2003
NCDOT Wetland Delineation for R-2245
NCDOT LIDAR Topography- 2ft and Sft contours
Brunswick County Soil Map
USFWS/USGS National Wetland Inventory
DCM NC Crews Wetland Areas
These files are referenced into the workspace, one at a time, using the standard
Microstation MDL reference file function, with the aerial photography layer as the
background so as not to obscure the line files. Line weights and colors for the various
files may need to be adjusted to improve appearance.
The NCDOT wetland delineation for R-2245 is reviewed first for commonly occurring
factors since these are known and verified jurisdictional wetland areas. Adjacent non-
wetland areas, i.e. uplands, are also reviewed for commonly occurring factors. Notes are
made of which factors that, in combination, typically occur in the wetland areas or in the
upland areas. Factors that typically occur in wetland areas are low topographic zones and
crenulations, hydric soils, wetland classifications, and natural wetland vegetated
communities. Factors that typically occur in upland areas are higher topographic zones,
non-hydric soils, upland classifications, and natural upland vegetated communities.
Contrasts are made of the expressions of these two areas on aerial photography.
Then the interior of the conservation easement is perused for similar expressions of
upland areas, as described above, based on the experience and judgement of the assessor.
Using the standard drawing tool in Microstation, estimated boundaries of each upland
area are outlined and closed polygons are created. The acres of each polygon are then
calculated using the standard Microstation measuring tool. The acres of all the polygons
are then added to get the total estimated upland acres. This total is subtracted from the
surveyed easement area to estimate the total acres of wetland.

Reserve Development Company, LLC (RDC)
The conservation easement boundaries within land owned by RDC (St. James) adjacent
to the proposed roadway follow the wetland delineation lines around the East Bay area
and the North Bay area, joined by a approximately 300-foot wide Wildlife Corridor.
Within these easement boundaries lie several small upland patches, totaling
approximately 20 acres based on the estimation method described above. The result is a
total of approximately 430 acres of wetland and upland within the conservation easement
boundaries on the RDC property.
Williamson
The conservation easement boundaries within land owned by the Williamson family
follow the wetland delineation lines around the West Bay area, minus an area of upland
on which a clubhouse is proposed, and the western end of the East Bay area, joined by an
approximately 300-foot wide Wildlife Corridor; plus three future park areas (PR3, PR11,
PR13) west of the proposed roadway. Within these easement boundaries lie several small
upland patches, totaling approximately 160 acres based on the estimation method
described above. The result is a total of approximately 450 acres of wetland and upland
within the conservation easement boundaries on the Williamson property.

8.0 Funding. Nothing in this Agreement obligates any of the parties to pay
any monies to any other party to this Agreement. In the event that a party to this
Agreement enters into a contract, grant or Interagency Agreement with another party to
this Agreement, the validly executed contract, grant or Interagency Agreement shall
control the disbursement of any funding, the applicable scope of work and the resolution
of any disputes involving the contract, grant or Interagency Agreement.
9.0 Authorities. No Provision or requirement in this Agreement shall affect
or otherwise alter any of the delegated legal authorities of any of the signatory agencies.
This Agreement shall be effective on the date of the last signature below.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each executed this Agreement, this
the day of , 2006.
Len Sanderson
NCDOT, State Highway Administrator
~y
., f ~~ohn Sullivan, III
FHWA, Division Administrator
A. Stanley Meiburg
USEPA, Deputy Regional Administrator
I ='i~
/-~ ~
Demps y B ton
NCDENR, Chief Deputy Secretary
JZ.zo - D~
Date
(--~z-o7
Date
Date
/--/~-~
Date
5

Subject: MOU on Control of Access for R-2245, 2nd Bridge to Oak Island, Brunswick
Co.
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:08:50 -0500
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Joseph: This e-mail serves to address your request that EPA provide a written confirmation
regarding the above listed subject matter. It has been confirmed that Heinz Mueller, Chief of the
NEPA Program Office received the MOU originals from NCDOT on 1/24/07 and that you spoke with
him regarding EPA's formal approval of the MOU. EPA will unlikely be able to get the MOU signed
by 1/26/07 and that we will require several days to obtain a formal approval signature from senior
management. Nonetheless, this e-mail also serves to confirm that from an EPA staff perspective,
the MOU proposed fianl revisions to the access points following the last Merger meeting was
acceptable. Furthermore, the recommended changes to the draft MOU from EPA's legal counsel
were incorporated into the revised MOU several months earlier. In conversation with Heinz on
1/23, we fully expect that a senior manager at EPA will sign the MOU. It is important to note for
the administrative record that this 'control of access' MOU is viewed by me (and others) to be a
'contingency' to address potential future breaks in access from the new facility that could
potentially cause impacts to jurisdiction waters of the U.S. It is one of the key environmental
commitments proposed by NCDOT and FHWA that addresses avoidance and minimization measures
for indirect and cumulative impacts. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that the other three
parties (FHWA, NCDOT & NCDENR) to the MOU have already signed the MOU and the only party left
to formally agree is EPA. We will immediately notify the other parties and the USACE and
NCDCM as soon as it becomes officially signed. Thank you.
Christopher A. Militscher, REM, CHMM
USEPA Raleigh Office
Merger Team Representative
919-856-4206
1 of 1